The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal of West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Beth Walker’s participation in a high-stakes natural gas royalty case that could have had significant financial implications for energy companies in which her husband owned stock.
Justices announced their denial of a petition in the case as part of a long list of court orders made public on Monday. There was no further comment from the court on the case.
Attorneys for Katherine Leggett and other plaintiffs in the case had urged the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the appeal of the case, in which the West Virginia court reversed its own ruling after Walker was elected and replaced Justice Brent Benjamin.
In the case, the state Supreme Court ultimately ruled — once Walker took office — that natural gas drillers can deduct post-production costs for things like gathering, transporting and treating natural gas after it is extracted from the royalties paid to certain types of mineral owners. The finding was a significant victory for the industry, with millions of dollars riding on the outcome for natural gas companies and mineral owners in the state’s Marcellus Shale gas region.
In late May, on the Friday afternoon before the three-day Memorial Day weekend, the state Supreme Court ruled by a 4-1 vote that EQT Production Co. was allowed to deduct post-production costs. The case specifically concerned payments to mineral owners whose leases with gas drillers were covered under a 1982 West Virginia law meant to update old “flat-rate” leases that, in many instances, dated back to the turn of the 20th century. Legislators had passed that law to reform a system that left many mineral owners being paid only a flat rate, such as $300 a year, regardless of how much gas was being produced and how much profit drillers were making.
In the Leggett case, plaintiffs argued that EQT had been wrongly deducting post-production expenses before paying owners their royalties on a tract that had been covered by a 1906 lease that was updated according to the 1982 law.
The court’s ruling was a reversal from a 3-2 November 2016 decision in which the court ruled that post-production cost deductions were not allowed on those leases. The state court also had ruled, more than a decade ago in a case called “Tawney v. Columbia Natural Resources,” that post-production deductions generally were not allowed.
Between the November 2016 and May 2017 rulings, Walker took office, having defeated Benjamin in a statewide election. Justice Margaret Workman also switched sides, ruling against the gas company in 2016 and joining the majority in EQT’s favor this year.
The U.S. Supreme Court petition, though, focused on Walker’s involvement in the Jan. 25 vote to grant EQT’s request for a rehearing of the matter. The vote was 3-2. Walker joined the two justices who previously voted in EQT’s favor, Allen Loughry and Menis Ketchum, to grant the rehearing request. The two justices who previously had voted with Benjamin against the gas company, Workman and Robin Davis, voted not to rehear the case.
In their petition, the Leggett attorneys had recounted that they became aware, in April 2017, of a state Ethics Commission financial disclosure in which Walker reported that her husband, Mike Walker, owned stock in “many natural gas and energy companies, including Chevron Corporation, Columbia Pipeline Group, Conoco Phillips, Dominion Resouces, Duke Energy Corporation, General Electric Corporation, Portland General Electric, and ExxonMobile Corporation.” ExxonMobile subsidiary XTO Energy has significant operations in West Virginia.
After briefs were already filed in the rehearing, and about a week before the oral argument, the Leggett attorneys filed a motion asking that the argument be called off and the rehearing ended, citing Walker’s involvement, and arguing that her husband’s financial holdings created a conflict that violated the plaintiffs’ right to due process. Among other things, they noted that Mike Walker had loaned his wife’s Supreme Court campaign $525,000. Under court rules, canceling Walker’s vote on the rehearing motion would result in the rehearing motion being denied by an equally divided vote.
Walker issued an initial memo to the court clerk on April 26, saying she did not believe she or her husband had an economic interest in the case. On May 1, Walker issued a second memo, which said “out of an abundance of caution, my husband has divested himself of ownership of shares of stock of any company engaged in the business of producing coal, oil and gas, wind, or solar energy.”